I mean unwarranted division, in my opinion, of the different sects of Christianity. There are so many different parts of Christianity such as Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, etc...and I feel that is why Christianity seems to be losing the worldwide battle. The worldwide battle against secularism, atheism, Islam, and all other religions or beliefs that in some way deny Jesus as the Son of God, our Savior, our Christ.
We are losing because we are divided. Catholics were divided even before the reformation was started by Martin Luther. And ever since, there are splits, from splits from splits that the family tree of Christ's Church should not have any branches, but has hundreds. This is distressing to me.
When Martin Luther started the reformation one of his biggest problems with the Catholic Church was "indulgences". An indulgence is when a person would give money to have their sins absolved. Many denominations today do not do this anymore, not even the Catholic Church, Lutheran, Methodist, and so on. But many are now doing the exact same thing. I hear of many preachers saying that if you want to win God's affection, or win his grace, that you must do all kinds of good deeds including giving all your money to that preacher (I use the term preacher loosely for these people) and God will give you fame, glory and riches. I really cannot name one person that gave all their money to one of these preachers that became rich and famous, they just became poor. They use the story of Job for justification, in error. They completely miss and bastardize the story of Job for their own personal financial gain. This creates great division within Christianity. Greed.
Before I continue, let me address exactly why we should do good. Some people will say "Why should I do something good if I don't get anything in return." To those, I will call selfish. We should do good for goods sake. It is simply the right thing to do. We do things unselfishly, not expecting anything in return, to honor God. If you do good expecting something in return, you are making yourself your own god. Which, I assure you that you are not. There is absolutely nothing you can do to earn God's love. You already and always have had God's love.
Another issue I want to address are these churches that call themselves "bible based" churches. Seriously? I do not understand this concept. All Christian churches are Bible based. They say that anything that is not written in the Bible should not be done. Again, seriously? If this is the case then you are denying all traditions before the Bible was actually written. Do they really think the Bible was written immediately after Jesus died? NO! So, what did the early Christians do? Sit around waiting for the Bible to be written? Of course not. I say, that if you deny tradition then you deny part of Christian heritage. If you deny many writings of the early Church, you deny wisdom and knowledge. And this is where division comes from.
What should we do as Christians? Become educated about our religion and not only spread the word of Jesus Christ, but spread the education. If we do not. We fail again.
We failed God when Adam and Eve sinned. We fail God every time we sin. God never will quit loving us even though we continue to fail God. But if we keep the divisions, we will keep failing God. We are one body in Christ.
These division greatly distress and saddens me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I read your post, and saw things that I would like to discuss, but one mistake (a common one) stood out so that I could only comment on it in particular; and that is what you said about Indulgences in Luther's time: "a person would give money to have their sins absolved."
ReplyDeleteFor one thing, the Indulgence wasn't being bought; it was being awarded for almsgiving. And, an Indulgence doesn't absolve sins; it just remits temporal punishment. Moreover, the Church's teaching on Indulgences has not changed. Allow me to quote an explanation from my favorite author, Hilaire Belloc:
"The dogma of the Church was the same thing as it is to-day: the merits of the saints may be applied by her authority to ourselves - not to the remission of sin but of its punishment - on our performing some salutary act.
"But there was a damnable abuse in practice. For one thing there was an abuse in the extent of Indulgences; for another in the perfunctory carelessness as to their object, but more in the uncorrected between the payment of money as an alms, and the payment of money as a purchase - a confusion most natural, and one which should have made the authorities exceptionally careful in their exercise in the practice. So far from showing exceptional care their negligence allowed the gross superstition to take root that relief from the punishment of sin could be purchased. Worse than that no can read the contemporary evidence without deciding that masses of men had fallen into accepting an indulgence as a remission of sin: an absolution.
I made a typo and want to make sure that you understand what Belloc is saying. It's supposed to say "no one can" in that last sentence.
ReplyDeleteI will grant you that my definition of "indulgences" was a little simplistic, but I still feel it was accurate. Based on your own quote, "Worse than that no one can read the contemporary evidence without deciding that masses of men had fallen into accepting an indulgence as a remission of sin". We can say that the church did not officially sanctify this action, but it was taking place.
ReplyDeleteIn a letter by Martin Luther to the Archbishop of Mainz in 1517
"Papal indulgences for the building of St. Peter's are circulating under your most distinguished name, and as regards them, I do not bring accusation against the outcries of the preachers, which I have not heard, so much as I grieve over the wholly false impressions which the people have conceived from them; to wit, -- the unhappy souls believe that if they have purchased letters of indulgence they are sure of their salvation; again, that so soon as they cast their contributions into the money-box, souls fly out of purgatory; furthermore, that these graces [i.e., the graces conferred in the indulgences] are so great that there is no sin too great to be absolved, even, as they say -- though the thing is impossible -- if one had violated the Mother of God; again, that a man is free, through these indulgences, from all penalty and guilt."
It may not have been the church's official stance, but it seems to me that it was happening.
Yes, that is what I was saying. A great many people fell into superstition and there were surely practical abuses on the part of the clergy, but there was not a compromise as far as the actual doctrine about Indulgences was concerned. For, just as Luther must have thought when he wrote that letter, the Indulgences were not for sale and they were not absolutions.
ReplyDeleteThe mistake that Luther made (and this is related to the main point of your post) was that he, instead of seeking internal reform, created a break with Catholic unity; and we continue to feel the baleful effects of that break today.
You said that you feel like disunity is why we are losing the battle against secularism, atheism, etc., and I say that you are right. The culture of Europe (of which America is an extension) was founded upon the unity of the Church; and, now that that has been broken thus, it is floundering.
All around us you can see the fruits of this fact. And it is not only in the widespread immorality that has brought about our culture's appalling acceptance of such evils as abortion and practicing homosexuality, but also in our general, undebated lifestyle and mindset.
In 1926, Chesterton referred to a "Pagan laxity in dress and manners". Today, that laxity has grown to a monstrous extreme. Coats and ties, which ought to be regarded as normal daily attire, are regarded as "dressy", while no one bats an eye at the immodesty and slovenliness of the t-shirts and sandals which would have been scandalous as few as sixty years ago. And who would have thought that, today, male students would sit in class with their hats on? Not only do they do so, but they do so guiltless and unquestioned.
But that is just one example. The corruption of our culture can also be seen in our art and music, in the way we treat and think about women, in the nature of our entertainment, and so on. It is not only a "culture of death", but a culture that is dying.
The only beginning to a solution that I can see would, indeed, be a restoration of Christian unity, an end to division. But how can that be accomplished?
Those successive splits that you see are the product of Protestantism's lack of a unifying structure. If one starts with the premise that the individual believer has the final say in matters of faith and morals, what can he expect? The heresy of the Reformation has gone into its final phase, I think, and, through the loss of doctrine and morals, it will eventually just cease to be or become something entirely different.
Catholics, too, have been affected. When I look at my fellow Catholics at the university, I see people who cling tenaciously to the name "Catholic", go to Mass, say the Rosary, and so on; but their daily lives, the way they present themselves, and the way they think is little different from that of their Protestant brethren.
I see this, and I have to remember the words of our Lord: "Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Even though everyone seems to be going along with the deadly trends of our times, I know which side will prevail in the end.